Covenant vs. Dispensation

[Ebb]

If Ryrie calls himself a "revised dispensationist", then he is. I haven't read that he calls himself this. The statements about classic dispensationism vs. revised disp. vs. progressive disp. posted earlier in one post do not have a source listing. I don't have any idea where it comes from.

I found the source of the "copy and paste" (at the bottom of the page):
http://www.theologicalstudies.org/dispen.html

And here is another source that uses the same classification of "revised" for Ryrie:
http://www.reformationonline.com/israel2.htm

 

[bleechers]

The Church is rightly spoken of as a "mystery" by Paul (Eph 3, etc.) If the church, born on Pentecost, pre-existed Pentecost or was just a continuation of some Israeli-church, then it would hardly be a "mystery".

Jesus stated: "I will build my church." Future tense.

 

[Ebb]

The Church is rightly spoken of as a "mystery" by Paul (Eph 3, etc.) If the church, born on Pentecost, pre-existed Pentecost or was just a continuation of some Israeli-church, then it would hardly be a "mystery".

Jesus stated: "I will build my church." Future tense.

What does Paul say the mystery was? Was it the Church itself? Or that Gentiles would be part of the Church?

"That the Gentiles should be fellowheirs, and of the same body, and partakers of his promise in Christ by the gospel:" Ephesians 3:6

The Church itself is prophecied many times in the Old Testament:

http://www.pbministries.org/Eschatology/bonar/bonar_01.htm

...Old Testament believers did not occupy a lower level than we do; nor did they walk in legal bondage because they had not yet seen the cross. They were "saints" as truly as we are (Ex. 19 :6; Lev. 11 :44, 19:2; Deut. 33 :3; Ps. 89:5-7); dwelt in, and filled with the Holy Spirit (Ex. 28:3, 31:3, 35:31; Num. 11:17, 25; 2 Sam. 23:2; Prov. 1:23; Isa. 44:3, 63:11; Micah 3:8; 2 Pet. 1:21); soils of God (Ex. 4:22, 23; Prov. 3:11; Jer. 31:9-20; Hosea 1:10; Heb. 12:5); God’s royal priesthood (Ex. 19 :6) ; God’s portion and inheritance (Deut. 32:9); heirs of the kingdom of heaven (Matt. 8:11); strangers upon earth (1 Chron. 29:15; Ps. 39:12; Heb. 11:13); partakers of the first resurrection (Heb. 11:35) ; members of Christ’s body (Isa. 26:19); His spouse and bride (Ps. 45:10-14; Cant. 4:8; Isa. 54:5; 62:5); partakers of the heavenly calling (Heb. 11:10, 16). In short, there is nothing affirmed of New Testament saints that is not affirmed of Old Testament ones; and to say that because Israel as a nation had the earthly things, therefore the" saints in Israel had not the heavenly, is to overlook some of the clearest declarations of the Word. The mystery or secret which the apostle announces (Eph. 3:6), was not that a new thing called the church had commenced at Pentecost (there is no hint of such a thing), but that into the old and well-known body, THE CHURCH, so often spoken of in the Old Testament, and symbolized in the Song of Solomon as THE church without spot or wrinkle (Song 4:7), the Gentiles were to be introduced and set on the same level as the Old Testament members. "That the Gentiles should be fellow-heirs (with the ancient saints), and of the same body" (with them), is the fair interpretation of the apostle’s language.

See also Charles Spurgeon:

http://www.pbministries.org/articles/Spurgeon/spurgeon01_02.htm

 

[bleechers]

The Church itself is prophecied many times in the Old Testament:

"Prophecied" = future tense.

I will build my church.

were "saints" as truly as we are...

This doesn't change the dispensational aspect of the church being a temporary, new creation post Pentecost. The difference is, that in the church age we have full knowledge and we no longer function in shadows.

Colossians 2
16 Let no man therefore judge you in meat, or in drink, or in respect of an holyday, or of the new moon, or of the sabbath days:
17 Which are a shadow of things to come; but the body is of Christ.


The "Body of Christ" is separate from OT saints. They were not sealed by the Holy Spirit and indwelled by the Holy Spirit. The HS could come and go from them, not so in the church.

That does not make the church "superior," just in a better position in terms of knowledge. The OT "saints" went to Paradise at death, we enter directly into the presence of God.

Hebrews 8
6 But now hath he obtained a more excellent ministry, by how much also he is the mediator of a better covenant, which was established upon better promises.

The new creation of God, the church - the Body of Christ, is in a "better" position that the OT saints. The Apostles after the resurrection were in a better position before. Jesus even told them that He could not reveal certain truths to them because they were not able to handle them pre-Calvary.

Again, Covenant theology likes to thrust arguments upon dispensationalists that we do not make.

Since you obviously believe that the temple system did not exist before the temple and that the temple system no longer exists... you then believe in at least 3 different dispensation.

 

[@@Paul@@]

What does Paul say the mystery was? Was it the Church itself? Or that Gentiles would be part of the Church?

"That the Gentiles should be fellowheirs, and of the same body, and partakers of his promise in Christ by the gospel:" Ephesians 3:6

The Church itself is prophecied many times in the Old Testament:

Actually, Paul made is pretty clear the "fellowship of the mystery" was Hid in God, and revealed to him.....

Can something that's hidden in God, be more deeply revealed from the scriptures of the prophets??

Deu 29:29 The secret things belong unto the LORD our God: but those things which are revealed belong unto us and to our children for ever, that we may do all the words of this law.​

...........when was the "fellowship of the mystery" revealed to us?

 

[Ebb]

This doesn't change the dispensational aspect of the church being a temporary, new creation post Pentecost. The difference is, that in the church age we have full knowledge and we no longer function in shadows.

I believe you have misstated the Church being "temporary", even in dispensational circles. The Church is without end.

"Prophesy" is not necessarily future, but is defined variously:

1. To reveal the will or message of God.
2. To predict the future as if by divine inspiration.
3. To speak as a prophet.

Dispensationalism's view of the Church and Israel being separate and Covenant Theology's one Church of both Jew and Gentile is something we will just have to agree to disagree on.

 

[bleechers]

I believe you have misstated the Church being "temporary", even in dispensational circles. The Church is without end.

Temporary in the sense that it comes to an earthly end at the Rapture. It is separate and distinct from the Tribulation saints. In the heavenlies of eternity, "the church" becomes a somewhat insignificant distinction.

The "Church Age" (The Dispensation of Grace) is temporal. It had a beginning (Pentecost) and it will end (Rapture).

"Prophesy" is not necessarily future, but is defined variously:

I actually thought about this after I posted last... I realize this, but my self-mulling was along these lines: I don't think the church was seen in the OT, even prophetically. Gentile salvation was seen (Gentiles were saved in the OT, but not large-scale), but not necessarily "the church". Like Christ's first coming, it was not understood.

Even accepting your A, B, and C... why would "the church" need to be continually "revealed" to Israel if Israel was "the church"? That is a rhetorical question, not a topic for debate.

is something we will just have to agree to disagree on.

Agreed... or diagreed, depending on how you look at it, I guess...?